Hin-Tak Leung <[email protected]> writes:
> On Saturday, 24 July 2021, 19:35:12 BST, Salah Triki <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Replace udev with usb_get_dev() in order to make code cleaner.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Salah Triki <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl818x/rtl8187/dev.c | 4 +---
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl818x/rtl8187/dev.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl818x/rtl8187/dev.c
>> index eb68b2d3caa1..30bb3c2b8407 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl818x/rtl8187/dev.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl818x/rtl8187/dev.c
>> @@ -1455,9 +1455,7 @@ static int rtl8187_probe(struct usb_interface *intf,
>
>> SET_IEEE80211_DEV(dev, &intf->dev);
>> usb_set_intfdata(intf, dev);
>> - priv->udev = udev;
>> -
>> - usb_get_dev(udev);
>> + priv->udev = usb_get_dev(udev);
>
>> skb_queue_head_init(&priv->rx_queue);
>
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>
> It is not cleaner - the change is not functionally equivalent. Before
> the change, the reference count is increased after the assignment; and
> after the change, before the assignment. So my question is, does the
> reference count increasing a little earlier matters? What can go wrong
> between very short time where the reference count increases, and
> priv->udev not yet assigned? I think there might be a race condition
> where the probbe function is called very shortly twice. Especially if
> the time of running the reference count function is non-trivial.
>
> Larry, what do you think?
BTW, please don't use HTML in emails. Our lists drop all HTML mail (and
for a good reason).
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches